Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: Iron and Bronze.

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Trevor Peterson <06PETERSON AT cua.edu>
  • To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Iron and Bronze.
  • Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:01:15 -0400


>===== Original Message From Ian Goldsmith <iangoldsmith1969 AT yahoo.co.uk>
=====
>Now if the writer/s were familiar with the new
>innovation of iron against the older bronze, why
>mention iron in antiquity before bronze? If this text
>is indeed written later than Kings etc (not that I
>hold this view personally), why mention iron at all?
>
>If I were to write a story about my ancestors I
>wouldn't put in their hands items that didn't exist in
>their day, it'd be pointless. So why is Tubal-cain
>mentioned as the first iron worker?

Do you suppose that they knew their ancestors didn't use iron? I think
probably most of us have a reasonable idea of when would be inappropriate to
portray people as not using computers, because it's only been a generation or
two since computers came into use. But aside from specialists, how many
people
would know how far back you'd have to go to find people who didn't know what
paper was? Who knows when the first pencil was used? Sure, we know when
people
started using iron, but before archaeology really got going, was it widely
known? Is there any intrinsic reason to think that the use of metals should
have progressed over time? I think this is the general idea--that they were
assuming what would be only natural to assume at a point distant from the
events.

Trevor Peterson
CUA/Semitics





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page